It is fascinating to watch the rapid technological changes that are occurring worldwide. The first question, always, is the old Western question of stability. Can those old 18th century Islamic elements be satisfactorily wedded to a high-tech society where human capital is truly developed? Famously, countries outside the First World have suffered revolutions and upheavals when they are on the brink of First World status. Cuba was the most successful Latin American country with the fastest rise in living standards when Castro took over and destroyed the country. Iran was making astonishing progress when revolution interrupted its course. Venezuela also succumbed after the same fashion. The revolution that Marx predicted for the advanced countries occurred in Russia and China — outside the West. Why? Indeed, there was something special about the West that protected the West, that allowed for freedom and development and more. An Islamist might say that the West is rotten, decadent, corrupt, soulless, etc. But such assessments are simplistic. The West is many things at once. There are so many cultural and intellectual moving parts that we cannot easily say what the West is. There is bad and good mixed together. How do we sort and analyze the elements? As it happens, there are a couple of people whose “thoughts” (or thoughts attributed to them) made the West into something different: Socrates and Christ. Neither of them wrote books, by the way; but most books written after them, possessing any importance, were influenced by their followers. What made Socrates and Christ important? The idea of truth and truthfulness, above all — even to the disadvantage of tradition (the Vatican), or religious belief, or political authority. Institutions are famously untruthful and must be corrected for progress to occur (if we should even believe in progress). But how is it possible in any sense? Truth in this sense is only possible if you have martyrs to the truth, which Socrates and Christ exemplified. Here we have an ultimate kind of authority, personified in humble form, being executed unjustly. Certain ideals and ideas are here contained. Improbable ideas, to be sure. One might argue that the roots of these ideas have been partly pulled up in the West — yet they have always been but a light seasoning. The margin of effect may be small, but nonetheless decisive. In fact, without a certain residue of Socrates and Christ in mix you end up with establishments like those in China and Russia — autocratic criminal regimes. The question for you is: What does the Saudi Kingdom have that could make a real difference in the larger struggle that is unfolding between West and East? Do the Saudis have Freedom? Philosophy? Goodness? Justice? — stability? Or will the Kingdom follow the path of Cuba and Iran?
It depends on his successor. At this time, Muhammad bin Nayef, crown prince of Saudi Arabia until 2017, is still in detention along with some of his relatives. If the religious establishment rejects MBS and his politics, MBN could present himself as an alternative. But if the ruling faction managed to appoint Salman bin Salman (son of MBS) as crown prince, the program could continue. But after all, this is very speculative.
MBS's quest to modernize saudi should be wished well as should the islamic republic's quest to modernize iran. they each have their difficulties, and MBS gets money and strings from America while Iran gets sanctions and bombs, but in the end the middle east will not grow out of the clientelism that replaced the Pax Ottoman until the major powers Arab, Persian, Turkic and Hebrew, come together to sort their collective interest. Saudi and Iran together have the capacity to bring the rest and MBS is in the cat bird seat, perhaps bidding his time and collecting internal strength. the genesis of the political trends is different, one smothered by wahabism the other by the shah, so the obstacles, maneuvers and hegemonic complexion are bound to be different. this article wishfully invents the categorization of MBS as the 'west modern' camp and the categorization of Iran as the 'non west primitive' camp, a reminiscence of the heyday of western liberal alliance, when a section of the highly educated sympathized with the west in gharbzadegi, and considered islam, ethics and tradition as opponents to be marginalized rather than the largest field of modernization. the western gharbzadegi is evaporating as quickly as the western alliance breaks up. Saudi and Iran are both members of BRICS, the majority of the world population that is industrializing on the foundation of their own non western cultures and ethics, without the erstwhile tutelage of fickle western powers said to be the 'one way'. the shoe is on the other foot as workers in the advanced countries suffer from industrial obsolescence and have flocked to nativist political trends revolting against the post WWII western liberal establishment. moreover the inexorable transition to intelligent software enabled society with substantial automation of both thinking and dexterous tasks will reveal residual work with various complexities that require humans. The rising conceptual and ethical demands on labor in an automated society may reveal that the liberal neutrality toward ethics was a feature of simple industrial society but not fit for more complex and longer lives, and the senior ethic systems, religions and materialism, evolved over millennia, remain the reservoirs most capable to help persons adapt to new challenges and raise new generations to optimistically engage challenge and extend the human journey. what is really anachronism is american divide and conquer diplomacy and aerial threat, this too is waning as China's facilitating of Saudi-Iran diplomatic relations shows.
It is interesting that you call this article wishful. But you are also wishful. Perhaps less realistic in weighing the tragic circumstances that are overtaking all of humanity.
I think Iran’s clerical leaders pushed the country over the edge in their war against the West. Their people have had enough of their murderous nonsense. I hope Iran becomes a bulwark of freedom. Wouldn’t that be a gift to humanity?
dont forget the tragic consequences that are overtaking all of the metropolitan global liberal democratic colony. they no longer have the wherewithall. as prosperity creates a multi polar world, it will see development differently
Très intéressant. Je me demande si d’autres pays comme les EAU n’ont pas servi de source d’inspiration à MBS. Quelles sont les différences d’évolution entre les deux pays ? Merci
It is fascinating to watch the rapid technological changes that are occurring worldwide. The first question, always, is the old Western question of stability. Can those old 18th century Islamic elements be satisfactorily wedded to a high-tech society where human capital is truly developed? Famously, countries outside the First World have suffered revolutions and upheavals when they are on the brink of First World status. Cuba was the most successful Latin American country with the fastest rise in living standards when Castro took over and destroyed the country. Iran was making astonishing progress when revolution interrupted its course. Venezuela also succumbed after the same fashion. The revolution that Marx predicted for the advanced countries occurred in Russia and China — outside the West. Why? Indeed, there was something special about the West that protected the West, that allowed for freedom and development and more. An Islamist might say that the West is rotten, decadent, corrupt, soulless, etc. But such assessments are simplistic. The West is many things at once. There are so many cultural and intellectual moving parts that we cannot easily say what the West is. There is bad and good mixed together. How do we sort and analyze the elements? As it happens, there are a couple of people whose “thoughts” (or thoughts attributed to them) made the West into something different: Socrates and Christ. Neither of them wrote books, by the way; but most books written after them, possessing any importance, were influenced by their followers. What made Socrates and Christ important? The idea of truth and truthfulness, above all — even to the disadvantage of tradition (the Vatican), or religious belief, or political authority. Institutions are famously untruthful and must be corrected for progress to occur (if we should even believe in progress). But how is it possible in any sense? Truth in this sense is only possible if you have martyrs to the truth, which Socrates and Christ exemplified. Here we have an ultimate kind of authority, personified in humble form, being executed unjustly. Certain ideals and ideas are here contained. Improbable ideas, to be sure. One might argue that the roots of these ideas have been partly pulled up in the West — yet they have always been but a light seasoning. The margin of effect may be small, but nonetheless decisive. In fact, without a certain residue of Socrates and Christ in mix you end up with establishments like those in China and Russia — autocratic criminal regimes. The question for you is: What does the Saudi Kingdom have that could make a real difference in the larger struggle that is unfolding between West and East? Do the Saudis have Freedom? Philosophy? Goodness? Justice? — stability? Or will the Kingdom follow the path of Cuba and Iran?
What would change if MBS died suddenly? Is the power structure and intellectual capital such that his program could or would continue without him?
It depends on his successor. At this time, Muhammad bin Nayef, crown prince of Saudi Arabia until 2017, is still in detention along with some of his relatives. If the religious establishment rejects MBS and his politics, MBN could present himself as an alternative. But if the ruling faction managed to appoint Salman bin Salman (son of MBS) as crown prince, the program could continue. But after all, this is very speculative.
MBS's quest to modernize saudi should be wished well as should the islamic republic's quest to modernize iran. they each have their difficulties, and MBS gets money and strings from America while Iran gets sanctions and bombs, but in the end the middle east will not grow out of the clientelism that replaced the Pax Ottoman until the major powers Arab, Persian, Turkic and Hebrew, come together to sort their collective interest. Saudi and Iran together have the capacity to bring the rest and MBS is in the cat bird seat, perhaps bidding his time and collecting internal strength. the genesis of the political trends is different, one smothered by wahabism the other by the shah, so the obstacles, maneuvers and hegemonic complexion are bound to be different. this article wishfully invents the categorization of MBS as the 'west modern' camp and the categorization of Iran as the 'non west primitive' camp, a reminiscence of the heyday of western liberal alliance, when a section of the highly educated sympathized with the west in gharbzadegi, and considered islam, ethics and tradition as opponents to be marginalized rather than the largest field of modernization. the western gharbzadegi is evaporating as quickly as the western alliance breaks up. Saudi and Iran are both members of BRICS, the majority of the world population that is industrializing on the foundation of their own non western cultures and ethics, without the erstwhile tutelage of fickle western powers said to be the 'one way'. the shoe is on the other foot as workers in the advanced countries suffer from industrial obsolescence and have flocked to nativist political trends revolting against the post WWII western liberal establishment. moreover the inexorable transition to intelligent software enabled society with substantial automation of both thinking and dexterous tasks will reveal residual work with various complexities that require humans. The rising conceptual and ethical demands on labor in an automated society may reveal that the liberal neutrality toward ethics was a feature of simple industrial society but not fit for more complex and longer lives, and the senior ethic systems, religions and materialism, evolved over millennia, remain the reservoirs most capable to help persons adapt to new challenges and raise new generations to optimistically engage challenge and extend the human journey. what is really anachronism is american divide and conquer diplomacy and aerial threat, this too is waning as China's facilitating of Saudi-Iran diplomatic relations shows.
It is interesting that you call this article wishful. But you are also wishful. Perhaps less realistic in weighing the tragic circumstances that are overtaking all of humanity.
I wouldn’t wish the IR well after they declared "full-scale war" on Europe, America and Israel again some days ago.
I think Iran’s clerical leaders pushed the country over the edge in their war against the West. Their people have had enough of their murderous nonsense. I hope Iran becomes a bulwark of freedom. Wouldn’t that be a gift to humanity?
It would, but I’m not sure if the Islamist regime will fall without external support for the people of Iran. Let’s wish them the best!
Let’s bomb the IRCG bases and make the clerical pigs run back to Moscow State University where they were first recruited.
dont forget the tragic consequences that are overtaking all of the metropolitan global liberal democratic colony. they no longer have the wherewithall. as prosperity creates a multi polar world, it will see development differently
Let the spirit of early Abbasid Caliphs & the tribe of Al Farabi gently continue to guide MBS! 🙏🏽🙏🏽
Très intéressant. Je me demande si d’autres pays comme les EAU n’ont pas servi de source d’inspiration à MBS. Quelles sont les différences d’évolution entre les deux pays ? Merci
Very nice. 👏